2013/6/6 Cèsar Ordiñana <cordiny...@gvsig.com> > Hi, > > Thanks to the work of Jorge Piera they are really based on the ISO > 19107:2003 [1], which "specifies conceptual schemas for describing the > spatial characteristics of geographic features". > > GML (ISO 19136:2007) [2] is a XML encoding compliant with the previous > ISO, so geometry types are similar to gvSIG's. > > Regards. > > [1] > http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=26012 > [2] > http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=32554 > > Ok, whatever... I'm not brave enough to read any of these.. :^)
Kudos to jpiera!! Cheers. > El 06/06/13 17:26, Jordi Torres escribió: > > Hi Fran, > > That names are based in the GML specification AFAIK. > > Cheers. > > > 2013/6/6 Francisco Puga <fp...@cartolab.es> > >> Hi Cesar, >> >> There is any reason to choose that names, surface and so on, instead >> the more common denominations? >> >> 2013/6/6 Simon Cropper <simoncrop...@fossworkflowguides.com>: >> > > Simon, would you be able to share the shapefile with us so we can >> try >> > > to find what is happening? >> > >> > I have I sent them to Joaquin del Cerro >> > >> > On 06/06/13 19:43, Cèsar Ordiñana wrote: >> >> El 06/06/13 10:44, Simon Cropper escribió: >> >>> Jukka, >> >>> >> >>> To be honest nor have I. >> >>> >> >>> This is what is reported in the gvSIG layer properties dialog. >> >> >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> The MultiSurface3D type is the gvSIG geometry type name, not the Shape >> >> type name, as it is independent of the data source type. >> >> >> >> The relationship between gvSIG geometry types and the shapefile ones >> is, >> >> more or less: >> >> >> >> - Surface: Polygon >> >> - Curve: Polyline >> >> - Point: Point >> >> - 3D: Z >> >> - 2D: Nothing >> >> >> >> We share the prefix "Multi" and when we add support for geometries with >> >> "M" it will be added as a suffix also. >> >> >> >> So a Shape of Polyline type should become a Curve2D in gvSIG, a Shape >> of >> >> PolygonZ type must become a Surface3D, ... In the case of a MultiPatch >> >> Shape, maybe it would become a MultiSurface2D or MultiSurface3D, but >> I'm >> >> not sure if this is being taken into account in the current code. >> Anyway >> >> I suppose this is not the case of Simon's shape file, so it seems to me >> >> there is a bug in the information shown in the layer properties dialog. >> >> >> >> Simon, would you be able to share the shapefile with us so we can try >> to >> >> find what is happening? If I understood you well, the file is opened in >> >> gvSIG but the editing and geoprocessing tools don't work with it. Is >> >> that so? >> >> >> >> Regards. >> >> >> > > -- > Cèsar Ordiñana Navarro > gvSIG software architect > DiSiD Technologies (http://www.disid.com) > > > _______________________________________________ > Gvsig_internacional mailing list > Gvsig_internacional@listserv.gva.es > > To see the archives, edit your preferences or unsubscribe from this > mailing list, please access this url: > > http://listserv.gva.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gvsig_internacional > > -- Jordi Torres
_______________________________________________ Gvsig_internacional mailing list Gvsig_internacional@listserv.gva.es To see the archives, edit your preferences or unsubscribe from this mailing list, please access this url: http://listserv.gva.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gvsig_internacional